Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jcp-open-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 97208 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2007 11:34:40 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 15 Aug 2007 11:34:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 55666 invoked by uid 500); 15 Aug 2007 11:34:37 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jcp-open-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 55482 invoked by uid 500); 15 Aug 2007 11:34:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jcp-open-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: jcp-open@apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list jcp-open@apache.org Received: (qmail 55473 invoked by uid 99); 15 Aug 2007 11:34:37 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 04:34:37 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.0 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: error (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [216.86.168.178] (HELO mxout-03.mxes.net) (216.86.168.178) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:34:43 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.16] (unknown [89.251.0.64]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83AB45193D for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 07:33:16 -0400 (EDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3) In-Reply-To: <19e0530f0708142125o60b74edblbd698e10abfadf39@mail.gmail.com> References: <5AA41F99-1CA4-499E-A9B2-61EA8BF2E1DE@pobox.com> <19e0530f0708142125o60b74edblbd698e10abfadf39@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Geir Magnusson Jr." Subject: Re: Upcoming JCP EC Meeting Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 07:33:15 -0400 To: jcp-open@apache.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Aug 15, 2007, at 12:25 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > "EC's understanding of the requirements of the JSPA" <== Is JSPA > ambiguous? can there be two or more ways to interpret what's in the > JSPA? There clearly are at least two ways, or we wouldn't be having this argument with Sun. Note that this fragment is to be understood in the context of the *rest* of the same sentence :) geir > > On 8/14/07, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: >> Clarification : >> >> It is the position of the JCP Executive Committees that TCK >> licenses >> must not be used to discriminate against or restrict compatible >> implementations >> of Java specifications. Licenses containing such limitations do >> not meet the >> EC's understanding of the requirements of the JSPA, the agreement >> under which the >> JCP operates, and violate the expectations of the Java community >> that JCP specs >> can be openly implemented. >> >> On Aug 13, 2007, at 8:43 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: >> >>> The ASF will be asking the EC of the JCP to vote on the a non- >>> binding motion that will be the same as or substantially similar to >>> the following : >>> >>> It is the position of the JCP Executive Committees that TCK >>> licenses >>> must not be used to discriminate against or restrict compatible >>> implementations >>> of Java specifications. Licenses containing such limitations do >>> not meet the >>> requirements of the JSPA, the agreement under which the JCP >>> operates, and violate >>> the expectations of the Java community that JCP specs can be >>> openly implemented. >>> >>> The intent is not a legal judgement by the members of the EC, but a >>> statement of support for java as an open spec ecosystem. >>> >>> geir >>> >>> >> >> > > > -- > Davanum Srinivas :: http://davanum.wordpress.com